Unacceptable! Prisco still wrong on #1

[JoeSixPat]

I expect Prisco still thinks Marino's a better QB than Montana.

 

[richpats]

I believe after the 2006 season, Manning's numbers will be less than amazing due to the loss of Edge, BTW a back Peyton has had HIS ENTIRE CAREER. Indy will fall back to the pack and the truth will be revealed that without an all-pro back, Peyton is a mere mortal at QB. Lucky for him that he'll have his top 2 receivers for the next few years.

Brady has been looking good with or without a dependable running game or great receivers.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

Look at where he ranks Ray Lewis, Randy Moss, and many others.

He even has Brett Favre on his top 50 list which is pretty funny if you ask me.

Much like the probowl, Prisco puts too much value on name recognition and not enough an actual ability to play the game.

If he ever does get fired as a journalist, he still has that 2nd job polishing Manning's knob.

 

[Jacky Roberts]

Brady vs. Manning is the classic Montana vs. Marino argument. One guy is clutch, wins championships, while the other re-writes statistics but can't win the big one. Personally, I'll take Brady, but I can see why some still think Manning is the best. Fantasy football-minded geeks will always pick Manning.

 

[QuiGon]

http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/9469847?topfifty53006

I just love this justification...

1. Peyton Manning, QB, Colts: A lot of people will argue with this choice, but his remains the most important position. When he finally does win a Super Bowl, he will finally get his due.

Nothing better than the promise of glory to raise your opinion about a player.

Woody Paige made a similar comment the day after Pittsburgh beat Indy, and I will say now what I said then: Peyton Manning will NEVER have the stars lines up as perfectly as he did in January of 2006. He had HFA and the Super Bowl was in a dome. He had a healthy o-line, healthy backfield and healthy WR corps. If he couldn't win in 2006, he will never win it.

 

[richpats]

Woody Paige made a similar comment the day after Pittsburgh beat Indy, and I will say now what I said then: Peyton Manning will NEVER have the stars lines up as perfectly as he did in January of 2006. He had HFA and the Super Bowl was in a dome. He had a healthy o-line, healthy backfield and healthy WR corps. If he couldn't win in 2006, he will never win it.

It's funny how a lot of consensus thinking was thrown out the window during last year's playoffs - consider:

1) Nobody thought 6th-seeded Pittsburgh could win the SB because of their history of chokes at home in the playoffs.
2) Few people picked Denver to beat us (or everybody was just scared to pick against us) simply because of Jake Plummer vs. Tom Brady, and we all know how that turned out.
3) Everybody believed (especially me once NE lost) that Indy had everything lined up for a SB title ....except themselves apparently.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

Woody Paige made a similar comment the day after Pittsburgh beat Indy, and I will say now what I said then: Peyton Manning will NEVER have the stars lines up as perfectly as he did in January of 2006. He had HFA and the Super Bowl was in a dome. He had a healthy o-line, healthy backfield and healthy WR corps. If he couldn't win in 2006, he will never win it.

...and best of all, the Patriots were not in the way to burst their bubble again... We lost vs Denver and I am not trying to downplay that, but I think if we had won vs Denver we would have won the SB again.

woulda... coulda... shoulda

Peyton knows better than anyone that one bad game can end your playoffs... then again, if you are REALLY lucky, it can win you a SB.

 

[richpats]

...and best of all, the Patriots were not in the way to burst their bubble again... We lost vs Denver and I am not trying to downplay that, but I think if we had won vs Denver we would have won the SB again.

woulda... coulda... shoulda

Peyton knows better than anyone that one bad game can end your playoffs... then again, if you are REALLY lucky, it can win you a SB.

Above all, we simply ran out of gas against Denver. Consider that the Pats played an extra month of football each of the 2 seasons before and we were at Game 18 in a physically-taxing season, plus on the road against a team determined to win ONE playoff game, we seriously were at a disadvantage. All that considered, we did look like the better team before all hell broke loose.

 

[Ring 6]

Interesting! I am not a Packer fan or even a Farve fan for that matter, but to say a sure fire first ballot HOF should not even be mentioned with Brady is kind of out there. I thought I would do a little comparison of the two. I am going to throw out the first year for both guys since farve played two games and Brady one.

Bradys first five years: Farves first five years: Check mark

Completions - 1,576 - 1,668 - Farve
Yards - 18,029 - 18,724 - Farve
TD- 123 - 147 - Farve
Int - 66 - 77 - Brady
SB wins 3 - 0 - Brady

If you look at the numbers they are pretty close. Sure Brady has the 3 Super Bowls, and Farve made it to the next 2 in his 6th and 7th year winning one. They both play in cold weather, and both are very durable. I am not saying one is better than the other. Just pointing out that maybe, just maybe Farve does measure up to Brady. Remember Farve has another ten years of stats and he pretty much dominated the league in mid to late 90's.

Interesting argument. All stats very identical except WINNING. And the one you downplay is WINNING which is the one that matters.

3 to 0 is the stat that separates them.

 

[Jacky Roberts]

Woody Paige made a similar comment the day after Pittsburgh beat Indy, and I will say now what I said then: Peyton Manning will NEVER have the stars lines up as perfectly as he did in January of 2006. He had HFA and the Super Bowl was in a dome. He had a healthy o-line, healthy backfield and healthy WR corps. If he couldn't win in 2006, he will never win it.

Throw in the fact that their nemesis from New England got bounced vs. Denver. Their path was cleared and they blew it.

 

[Brady-To-Branch]

One of my favorite links...

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=261&Category=7

In 2005, PM vs Brady (based on QB Ratings) head to head (Pats 40-21 loss)...

Manning: 117.1
Brady: 121.4

...only Brady didn't play against a sieve defense that featured no Seymour, no Rodney, or no Tedy. But, started Duane Starks, aka "The Human Torch", at CB.

 

[Kdo5]

No Rodney Harrison in the top 50? Not even in the "lost out" category. Give me a break. He's more experienced and has ten times more awareness than most of the safeties put on the list.

Pfft

 

[Kdo5]

One of my favorite links...

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=261&Category=7

In 2005, PM vs Brady (based on QB Ratings) head to head (Pats 40-21 loss)...

Manning: 117.1
Brady: 121.4

...only Brady didn't play against a sieve defense that featured no Seymour, no Rodney, or no Tedy. But, started Duane Starks, aka "The Human Torch", at CB.

The Colts defense is overrated, Brady exploited their weaknesses very early after they'd been "the best D in the league". I think he threw 2 touchdowns on his first two drives. Truth be told, I dont think the Colts D was all that great. If our D was actually normal, that game was ours.

No Seymour, Duane Starks had a bum foot, Samuel simply couldnt play one on one with Marvin Harrison if Rodney wasnt their to back him up. Randall Gay playing with a badly injured ankle didnt help either.

 

[Drewwho]

I don't know, I'm OK with Brady being a 'smidge' below Manning. Brady was not groomed for the QB position the way P. Manning was. Brady (according to IN THEIR OWN WORDS...) didn't even play organized football until he was a Sophmore in high school. He was always focused on baseball up until then.

Manning is a better passer, Brady is a better QB. Brady is a winner, Manning is a regular season QB stat machine -on and on it goes...it's a coin flip to most non Patriot or non Colt fans.

I think Tom Brady being listed in the top 2 best players in the NFL is pretty damned good for a 6th round, skinny kid with a weak throwing arm!

 

[SoonerPatriot]

Interesting! I am not a Packer fan or even a Farve fan for that matter, but to say a sure fire first ballot HOF should not even be mentioned with Brady is kind of out there. I thought I would do a little comparison of the two. I am going to throw out the first year for both guys since farve played two games and Brady one.

Bradys first five years: Farves first five years: Check mark

Completions - 1,576 - 1,668 - Farve
Yards - 18,029 - 18,724 - Farve
TD- 123 - 147 - Farve
Int - 66 - 77 - Brady
SB wins 3 - 0 - Brady

If you look at the numbers they are pretty close. Sure Brady has the 3 Super Bowls, and Farve made it to the next 2 in his 6th and 7th year winning one. They both play in cold weather, and both are very durable. I am not saying one is better than the other. Just pointing out that maybe, just maybe Farve does measure up to Brady. Remember Farve has another ten years of stats and he pretty much dominated the league in mid to late 90's.

Your numbers are wrong. Since 2001 Favre has thrown 98 picks. Brady has thrown 66. That's a difference of 33 picks. Very significant and in some ways, a staggering number. This demonstrates poor decision making. True, Favre was very good -- in the mid 90s. But that is eons ago in NFL terms.

 

[drpatriot]

Your numbers are wrong. Since 2001 Favre has thrown 98 picks. Brady has thrown 66. That's a difference of 33 picks. Very significant and in some ways, a staggering number. This demonstrates poor decision making. True, Favre was very good -- in the mid 90s. But that is eons ago in NFL terms.

He was looking at the first 5 years of each's career, not the last 5 years. I can see how Brady could be compared to Favre skillwise. However, I am glad that Brady has a much better attitude than Favre, and also that he has won 3 Super Bowls of course.

 

[Mr.Kilowatt]

Interesting argument. All stats very identical except WINNING. And the one you downplay is WINNING which is the one that matters.

3 to 0 is the stat that separates them.

How did I downplay it? I just put the stats and gave the mark to Brady. Personally I don't care who is better. I was just making the point that Farve is a hall of fame qb and that whoever said he shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Brady made no sense. I give Brady all the credit in the world. I think he is a great qb that plays in a great system, and they compliment each other very well. I also think Farve is a great qb that played in a system that was ideal for him. He is older now, and has no talent around him. Put him with Denver or Philly or Seattle and see how he does!!

 

[SoonerPatriot]

How did I downplay it? I just put the stats and gave the mark to Brady. Personally I don't care who is better. I was just making the point that Farve is a hall of fame qb and that whoever said he shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Brady made no sense. I give Brady all the credit in the world. I think he is a great qb that plays in a great system, and they compliment each other very well. I also think Farve is a great qb that played in a system that was ideal for him. He is older now, and has no talent around him. Put him with Denver or Philly or Seattle and see how he does!!

He's still be throwing a crap load of picks no matter where he plays. He's averaged just over 18 picks a year over his entire career. Poor decision making. His style has always been that of a gunslinger, and to put it more directly, reckless. Brady is not reckless and he doesn't make consistently poor decisions on the field as Favre has done for years.

Perhaps saying he shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Brady was a bit extreme. But my feeling is when the dust settles on Brady's career as it has settled on Favre's the difference in the quality of play between the two players will be vast and Brady will be on an entirely different level. As AJ said, 3 SB's to 1. Two SB MVPs to 1. An argument can be made the difference is already pretty clear. At the end of the day that's about the only stat that truly matters.

I think it's important to step away from the media hype and ball washing Favre has enjoyed each and every year of his career and focus on the entire picture -- the first 5 years, the middle 5 and the last 5. One idiot ESPN anaylst said this past season said he would prefer Favre on the field over any other QB in the league down 6 with two minutes to play. Maybe if this were 1996...

 

[PonyExpress]

I just got the ProFootballWeekly 2006 preview edition and Brady is ranked as the #1 player in the NFL, ahead of Manning. Seymour is #13, Ty Law #30.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Yeah, I saw that too. Brady #1, Manning #2... and I've seen the two flip-flopped all the last couple of years.

I look at it like this: they're both excellent players. Payton is the better passer. He just is. Tom is just better under pressure, mentally tougher, whatever. He just is. Brady's also been playing on the more balanced, better-coached team - hence the Super Bowls. What kind of quiet confidence do you get from that, that Manning forfeits because of season after season losing to NE (and different ways every time, at that?)

I think it all points to one thing - the Pats are more than the sum of their parts, the Colts less. That's how a better TEAM beat the better individuals for so long. There, I said it. Harrison and Wayne, or Givens and Branch? Edge or Antowain Smith (or, for only 1 full year, C Dillon?) And - by the numbers only - Manning (with his 49 TDs) or Brady (with half that number?) Freeney's what, 16 sacks? Or [your Pats player here's] 7-8?

To be fair, the Pats don't rely on one individual edge rusher, but the rest of this post should point up the differences here. The Pats rely on getting more out of the team than you would predict from each player.

Payton is, once again, the better passer. Tom, once again, is the winner. He's also very, very good at what he does. But the point in New England is not to construct a team of "the best at..." for 2 years or something. The point in NE is for every ounce of available talent to be discovered, developed, and molded into a team that wins - they can win by 3, they can win ugly, whatever... just so they win. They do not expect to sit around saying "Yeah but look how many yards Tommy threw for..."

And Ws, my friends - even moreso, playoff and super bowl Ws - are a team statistic.

PFnV